IL-3 Dem Primary: Election Day!

[dw93]

With it being this close, I wouldn't put it past Lipinski to pull a Lieberman and run third party should he lose the primary.

I think IL ballot law prevents that.

If Lipinski loses, and the GOP somehow drops Jones, could they nominate him instead?

No. It's way too late for him to file as a Republican and if there was a way to drop Jones, I think they would've done it by now. I think Lipinski can still run as an Independent though as I don't see anything in our state's ballot laws that would prevent him from running as an Independent in the general should he lose to Newman in the primary. He'd just have very limited time to file though. I could actually see the state GOP endorsing an Independent Lipinski candidacy though.

[Blair]

After the roaring success of a the DCCC in Texas I’m not too fussed.

Fwiw national democrats have always being backing him-but the question isn’t whether the Triple C back him, but how they do it. If they really cared they would have bought advertising last month, sent staff, done oppo research.

[Shadows]

To be fair, Justice Democrats endorsed around the time Gillibrand did.

Newman was a Justice Democrat even before the Gillibrand endorsement.

But Gillibrand has no following, is a nobody in the national stage with little name recognition. Her endorsement means nothing.

Sanders on the other hand won IL-03 vs Hillary Clinton. Gillibrand endorsing or not endorsing is nowhere the same as a Sanders endorsement !

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

After the roaring success of a the DCCC in Texas I’m not too fussed.

Fwiw national democrats have always being backing him-but the question isn’t whether the Triple C back him, but how they do it. If they really cared they would have bought advertising last month, sent staff, done oppo research.

Yeah, this is only the absolute minimum amount of backing they could get away with providing him.  Even the IL Democratic Party has more or less left Lipinski to fend for himself, which is part of why I'm really worried that Lipinski will caucus with the Republicans and/or generally do everything in his power to make life difficult for Democrats if he wins the primary.  He's been unofficially cut loose for all intents and purposes (and rightly so) by the vast majority of Democrats including the state party, D-trip, and most national Democrats.  This wasn't always the case.  In 2012, he was initially facing a serious liberal primary challenger who I suspect would've beaten him in the primary, but the legislature redrew his district to neutralize that challenge.  Given that Lipinski strikes me as a highly vindictive guy (even more so than Lieberman) and is probably running for his last term anyway, it's critical that he lose the Democratic primary this cycle.

[Gass3268]

Newman goes for the kill in a new ad

[Rookie Yinzer]

To be fair, Justice Democrats endorsed around the time Gillibrand did.

Newman was a Justice Democrat even before the Gillibrand endorsement.

But Gillibrand has no following, is a nobody in the national stage with little name recognition. Her endorsement means nothing.

Sanders on the other hand won IL-03 vs Hillary Clinton. Gillibrand endorsing or not endorsing is nowhere the same as a Sanders endorsement !

Literally no one took her challenge seriously until Gillibrand endorsed her. You are delusional.

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

Newman goes for the kill in a new ad

Come on Lipinski!!

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Newman goes for the kill in a new ad

Come on Lipinski!!

A pro-life anti LGBT pro pharma guy is the one getting you moist? Gross.

[Calthrina950]

This primary seems to be a good example of the ever-accelerating trend of polarization within this country. If Lipinski is defeated (which is a strong possibility at this point), then it would mean a further consolidation of the Democratic caucus, in terms of ideological thought. Both parties have become more and more extreme in recent years, and this has contributed to polarization. Why can there not be party members who don't always toe the party line on every single issue?

[Landslide Lyndon]

This primary seems to be a good example of the ever-accelerating trend of polarization within this country. If Lipinski is defeated (which is a strong possibility at this point), then it would mean a further consolidation of the Democratic caucus, in terms of ideological thought. Both parties have become more and more extreme in recent years, and this has contributed to polarization. Why can there not be party members who don't always toe the party line on every single issue?

Welcome to Atlas Forum mr. David Brooks.

[Calthrina950]

This primary seems to be a good example of the ever-accelerating trend of polarization within this country. If Lipinski is defeated (which is a strong possibility at this point), then it would mean a further consolidation of the Democratic caucus, in terms of ideological thought. Both parties have become more and more extreme in recent years, and this has contributed to polarization. Why can there not be party members who don't always toe the party line on every single issue?

Welcome to Atlas Forum mr. David Brooks.

I know who David Brooks is, and I know what you are implying by calling me that. But that shouldn't change the veracity of the points which I am arguing.

[Strudelcutie4427]

Wow bernie, way to turn on the working class who you claim to be for. Lipinski is one of the good guys in congress and working class centrist Dems are a dying breed (Lipinski, Lynch, Peterson, Kind, etc.) My whole family was once working class democrats, but Bernie, Newman, and their whole SJW crusade jolted us across the aisle. Please, people of IL-3, keep Dan Lipinski as your congressman

[Gass3268]

Wow bernie, way to turn on the working class who you claim to be for. Lipinski is one of the good guys in congress and working class centrist Dems are a dying breed (Lipinski, Lynch, Peterson, Kind, etc.) My whole family was once working class democrats, but Bernie, Newman, and their whole SJW crusade jolted us across the aisle. Please, people of IL-3, keep Dan Lipinski as your congressman

There is nothing working class about New Dem Ron Kind.

[Calthrina950]

Wow bernie, way to turn on the working class who you claim to be for. Lipinski is one of the good guys in congress and working class centrist Dems are a dying breed (Lipinski, Lynch, Peterson, Kind, etc.) My whole family was once working class democrats, but Bernie, Newman, and their whole SJW crusade jolted us across the aisle. Please, people of IL-3, keep Dan Lipinski as your congressman

What I find interesting is the "purity crusade" which seems to be occurring within both parties. For me, a political party that espouses just one ideology will have a "narrower" tent then one that tends to have a greater diversity of opinion. This primary also seems to be part of the longer-term trend towards the Democrats moving away from working-class populism, and towards a more, far left-wing platform.

[YE]

I'm fine with a big tent on issues like guns/abortion/immigration, but at the same time, there needs to be a difference between the two parties on economics of some sorts, at least in safe seats. If not, why have political parties at all? I'm not offended by Lipinski's social views but what I am bothered by is his vote against a centrist health care plan when he was in a blue seat.

The Blue Dog support for Lipinski is a bit baffling from an ideological prospective though given that he basically is a Republican, and there's a reason Blue Dogs on here aren't Republicans, and are usually willing to put aside one's support for abortion if they agreed with them on other issues. Rather, many here are slamming Newsman for her support for abortion. In reality, I think they fear - and to some extent I do as someone who is more left wing economically than socially and thinks party lines being driven by social issues is what's destroyed the country - that since a major source of Newman's support comes from the contrast between the two on social issues, the idea of purity becoming mainstream, specifically the idea that one must be in the mold of Kamala Harris to be a Democrat. Honestly, to me Lipinski is so bad that quite frankly at the end of the day, Marie Newman would be a much better Congresswoman than Lipinski, and I don't think the Justice Democrats have the firepower to repeatedly pull this off in race after race after race, so I'm not sure how extreme of a trend this will be. 

[Calthrina950]

I'm fine with a big tent on issues like guns/abortion/immigration, but at the same time, there needs to be a difference between the two parties on economics of some sorts, at least in safe seats. If not, why have political parties at all? I'm not offended by Lipinski's social views but what I am bothered by is his vote against a centrist health care plan when he was in a blue seat.

The Blue Dog support for Lipinski is a bit baffling from an ideological prospective though given that he basically is a Republican, and there's a reason Blue Dogs on here aren't Republicans, and are usually willing to put aside one's support for abortion if they agreed with them on other issues. Rather, many here are slamming Newsman for her support for abortion. In reality, I think they fear - and to some extent I do as someone who is more left wing economically than socially and thinks party lines being driven by social issues is what's destroyed the country - that since a major source of Newman's support comes from the contrast between the two on social issues, the idea of purity becoming mainstream, specifically the idea that one must be in the mold of Kamala Harris to be a Democrat. Honestly, to me Lipinski is so bad that quite frankly at the end of the day, Marie Newman would be a much better Congresswoman than Lipinski, and I don't think the Justice Democrats have the firepower to repeatedly pull this off in race after race after race, so I'm not sure how extreme of a trend this will be. 

I do think Lipinski's vote against Obamacare was wrong, and that is out of step with what I would expect a populist Democrat to support. However, I am concerned about the potential for "purism", and I do not believe that it would bode well for the Democratic Party (and the Republican Party), to completely shut out the voices of those who may diverge from some aspects of the party platform.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

Newman goes for the kill in a new ad

Come on Lipinski!!

A pro-life anti LGBT pro pharma guy is the one getting you moist? Gross.

Yeah, I'm not a Democrat but socially conservative Democrats are mind boggling to me and I probably wouldn't vote for one.

[MAINEiac4434]

I'm fine with a big tent on issues like guns/abortion/immigration, but at the same time, there needs to be a difference between the two parties on economics of some sorts, at least in safe seats. If not, why have political parties at all? I'm not offended by Lipinski's social views but what I am bothered by is his vote against a centrist health care plan when he was in a blue seat.

The Blue Dog support for Lipinski is a bit baffling from an ideological prospective though given that he basically is a Republican, and there's a reason Blue Dogs on here aren't Republicans, and are usually willing to put aside one's support for abortion if they agreed with them on other issues. Rather, many here are slamming Newsman for her support for abortion. In reality, I think they fear - and to some extent I do as someone who is more left wing economically than socially and thinks party lines being driven by social issues is what's destroyed the country - that since a major source of Newman's support comes from the contrast between the two on social issues, the idea of purity becoming mainstream, specifically the idea that one must be in the mold of Kamala Harris to be a Democrat. Honestly, to me Lipinski is so bad that quite frankly at the end of the day, Marie Newman would be a much better Congresswoman than Lipinski, and I don't think the Justice Democrats have the firepower to repeatedly pull this off in race after race after race, so I'm not sure how extreme of a trend this will be. 

I do think Lipinski's vote against Obamacare was wrong, and that is out of step with what I would expect a populist Democrat to support. However, I am concerned about the potential for "purism", and I do not believe that it would bode well for the Democratic Party (and the Republican Party), to completely shut out the voices of those who may diverge from some aspects of the party platform.

HE IS NOT A POPULIST DEMOCRAT

HE IS SLIGHTLY TO THE RIGHT OF LARRY HOGAN AND REPRESENTS CHICAGO

JESUS CHRIST

[AtorBoltox]

This primary seems to be a good example of the ever-accelerating trend of polarization within this country. If Lipinski is defeated (which is a strong possibility at this point), then it would mean a further consolidation of the Democratic caucus, in terms of ideological thought. Both parties have become more and more extreme in recent years, and this has contributed to polarization. Why can there not be party members who don't always toe the party line on every single issue?

Maybe one of the issues that is non negotiable is endorsing a sitting president of your own party?

[KingSweden]

Lipinski once said his political hero was Ronald Reagan. Now, that’s something I’d expect someone to say in a hard GOP district, but this is a Democrat in Chicago. I’m as centrist of a neoliberal DLC New Dem corporatist sellout moderate hack as you’ll find on here but Lipinski is hot garbage and his stance on abortion rights is low down my list of reasons that I’d prefer to see him BTFO

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

Wow bernie, way to turn on the working class who you claim to be for. Lipinski is one of the good guys in congress and working class centrist Dems are a dying breed (Lipinski, Lynch, Peterson, Kind, etc.) My whole family was once working class democrats, but Bernie, Newman, and their whole SJW crusade jolted us across the aisle. Please, people of IL-3, keep Dan Lipinski as your congressman

Very good, great statement by a great poster.

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

This primary seems to be a good example of the ever-accelerating trend of polarization within this country. If Lipinski is defeated (which is a strong possibility at this point), then it would mean a further consolidation of the Democratic caucus, in terms of ideological thought. Both parties have become more and more extreme in recent years, and this has contributed to polarization. Why can there not be party members who don't always toe the party line on every single issue?

Maybe one of the issues that is non negotiable is endorsing a sitting president of your own party?

So what? Just because they are the same party and are the president means that you have to endorse their reelection? I love Obama and would endorse him over and over again, but some democrats don't feel the same way, and I respect that.

[Calthrina950]

I'm fine with a big tent on issues like guns/abortion/immigration, but at the same time, there needs to be a difference between the two parties on economics of some sorts, at least in safe seats. If not, why have political parties at all? I'm not offended by Lipinski's social views but what I am bothered by is his vote against a centrist health care plan when he was in a blue seat.

The Blue Dog support for Lipinski is a bit baffling from an ideological prospective though given that he basically is a Republican, and there's a reason Blue Dogs on here aren't Republicans, and are usually willing to put aside one's support for abortion if they agreed with them on other issues. Rather, many here are slamming Newsman for her support for abortion. In reality, I think they fear - and to some extent I do as someone who is more left wing economically than socially and thinks party lines being driven by social issues is what's destroyed the country - that since a major source of Newman's support comes from the contrast between the two on social issues, the idea of purity becoming mainstream, specifically the idea that one must be in the mold of Kamala Harris to be a Democrat. Honestly, to me Lipinski is so bad that quite frankly at the end of the day, Marie Newman would be a much better Congresswoman than Lipinski, and I don't think the Justice Democrats have the firepower to repeatedly pull this off in race after race after race, so I'm not sure how extreme of a trend this will be. 

I do think Lipinski's vote against Obamacare was wrong, and that is out of step with what I would expect a populist Democrat to support. However, I am concerned about the potential for "purism", and I do not believe that it would bode well for the Democratic Party (and the Republican Party), to completely shut out the voices of those who may diverge from some aspects of the party platform.

HE IS NOT A POPULIST DEMOCRAT

HE IS SLIGHTLY TO THE RIGHT OF LARRY HOGAN AND REPRESENTS CHICAGO

JESUS CHRIST

By your definition, a populist Democrat is someone as left, or to the left, of Bernie Sanders.

[Calthrina950]

Wow bernie, way to turn on the working class who you claim to be for. Lipinski is one of the good guys in congress and working class centrist Dems are a dying breed (Lipinski, Lynch, Peterson, Kind, etc.) My whole family was once working class democrats, but Bernie, Newman, and their whole SJW crusade jolted us across the aisle. Please, people of IL-3, keep Dan Lipinski as your congressman

Very good, great statement by a great poster.

What do you feel about the drive to remove Lipinski from office? From my understanding, this is a traditional working-class kind of district, and one with a kind of "working-class religious" tint.

[Gass3268]

Wow bernie, way to turn on the working class who you claim to be for. Lipinski is one of the good guys in congress and working class centrist Dems are a dying breed (Lipinski, Lynch, Peterson, Kind, etc.) My whole family was once working class democrats, but Bernie, Newman, and their whole SJW crusade jolted us across the aisle. Please, people of IL-3, keep Dan Lipinski as your congressman

Very good, great statement by a great poster.

What do you feel about the drive to remove Lipinski from office? From my understanding, this is a traditional working-class kind of district, and one with a kind of "working-class religious" tint.

Ugh, I wish I could find it, but there was a great article recently about how radically this district has changed over the past decades. It has seen a mix of becoming more upscale in parts with greater diversification (about 1/3 Hispanic now).